Security → Port 139 always Open!!!

Security test shows always that Port 139 is open DUE TO MY NETWORK SETTINGS I can not change any thing or I face problems well, what is the alternative so I can use it to fix this problem without changing any network settings ? a friendly firewall may be ?!
Even with this security problem the NetBIOS test shows that my PC don't give any informations about any file sharing it gives only the Computer name ! is it really a danger thing ?

Thanks for any suggestions

If you run a personal firewall such as ZoneAlarm you will stealth those ports.
There are many threads here about setting it up and best of all it's free. You may want something more configurable like Tiny Firewall but you can wait until you get things stealth to do more research.
Have a nice day!

If you choose to go with ZoneAlarm, this thread will help you with its configuration along with some other security related topics.

Good luck!

Hey guys
Thanks for the informations. I will try "Zone Alarm" ! But I saw that there is a Pro version too! So what is the difference? is it really better or the free version will do the job ?
Thanks

The free version works well the pro version,is more configurable.

The free version should be more than sufficient. ZA Pro mostly offers more configuration options and is worth the money if you want total control over your connection. I'm, personally, using the free version and could not be happier.

I agree with SnapCase the free version is fine. But I wanted that extra control over my connection so I went with ZA Pro.

Thank you all
I got a lot of informations, and "...could not be happier" as "snapcase" said
I will go with the free one!

Thanks

If Zonealarm gives you any problems there is also »www.sygate.com There new 4.0 is very good. And it's also free for personal use, This does everything ZA does and more, And it has less problems.

I've had serious difficulties with a number of firewalls working with NAT and VPN. Sygate was on of the problem children. Other than that it is a pretty nice firewall and they have been around forever as a company.

Hi,
Guess what?
I decided to go with sygate personal fire wall !!!! Why ? Well, I found that it is the friendliest and the easiest one!today I tried Zone Alarm, Tiny and sygate. So the last one was the winner no problems, easy to use and my network still flying without any problem !!!

Sygate is what I have chosen, ZA is to much like shareware,
Just was not designed or built well, Sygate is a step up.
I'm playing around also with Tiny, But it's going to be a while before I understand everything well enough to trust it totally. If I rated them It would be Tiny {If you have lots of time and like tinkering } Then Sygate 4.0 No problems, very secure and modern. Then 3rd would be Zonealarm. Resource hog, Lots of problems and not as secure as Sygate, And did not catch a few things Sygate did, And not as user freindly. Sygate also has a great testing site.

Now, Bobbb, you're picking on one of my very favorite programs - good old ZoneAlarm. Could you be a bit more specific:

What about it is not designed or built well? ZA works at a more primitive layer of abstraction than Sygate does, and to me that is a better design for a firewall of any type.

How is ZA more like shareware than Sygate? They are both provided free of charge to personal/non-profit use. As a matter of fact, if you use ZA outside of those limits you have to pay for it. With Sygate you either get the free copy or you pay for the "real thing" for use in a business. To me that sounds like ZA has a commercial product they are willing to provided with full functionality to individuals, while Sygate gives the little people a stripped down version and if you're needing a "real" software firewall, then please use our 4-$ version.

I'm still waiting to see what new surprises SPF holds in store. As you will recall, an earlier version (no, not the current one) had a hole in it you could drive a pair of Mack trucks through side by side. Caused by working at the level of abstraction that it does.

I'll have to load up current version of SPF and see what the resource allocation is - when I tested both SPF and ZA, ZA was the clear winner in terms of CPU cycles and RAM use. Guess I'll have to grab the pencil and take notes again. Do you have numbers for CPU %/RAM usage for SPF?

Lots of problems? Even with the ones we see here at DSLR, I wouldn't call it "lots" when you consider there are over 8 million copies in use (or at least downloaded for use from the Z-D site alone).

A big thing in the choice between SPF and ZA would be trust - and based on my own comparisons of earlier versions of both, I choose to put my trust in ZA. Tiny would rank #2 in my book, primarily because I've never used it. But based on past performance of SPF for me, I'd have to put it as low man on the software firewall totem pole.

I would love to see factual comments regarding what you've said about ZA about design, quality, resource usage, problems and most specifically the one "not as secure as Sygate" - that one worries me. If you have evidence of this, please provide it. While I like ZA, if hard evidence shows I've chosen the wrong product, I am very willing to convert to a better one. Just as you seem to have abandoned BlackICE for SPF.

You said Zonealarm is less secure than the sygate program. I use Zonealarm and now I am worried. Why did you say that? How can I test it? I have run security scans from almost a dozen different sites and it has never failed to block them all - so what have I missed? This is important!

said by Bobbb:

---

ZA is to much like shareware,
Just was not designed or built well, Sygate is a step up.

---

Huh?

said by Bobbb:

---

Then Sygate 4.0 No problems, very secure and modern.

---

Modern??? is that a new requirement by ICSA?[/QUOTE]

said by Bobbb:

---

Resource hog, Lots of problems and not as secure as Sygate, And did not catch a few things Sygate did, And not as user freindly.

---

Can you tell us about those "lots of problems"? I'm also interested to know what was it that ZA didn't catch. Perhaps we can send them an email and let them know. And while you're at it please do tell us what you based your expert opinion on when you said it's not as secure as Sygate. For someone who's been using Sygate for a week and has known about ZA, BI, Tiny and SPF for about a month those are a lot of strong opinions.

Hang on a moment. I don't disagree on some points. I found ZA a bit "large", but that's the cost of a good UI. They could strip it down to less than half a meg, if they wanted the user to enter rulesets on the command line.

I prefer tiny over ZA. It has a smaller footprint and is more robust, the certification doesn't hurt. But, in the past few weeks, I have recommended ZA to several friends who were trojan hosts as they could deal with the user interface.

At an entry level people want something that works, and is intuitive. ZA wins, no question. For a bit more control, for those who understand basic IP concepts, tiny is better. To some, a more detailed configuration is in order, which none of these products offer, but the casual user will never need that detail anyway.

I DO welcome any and all input on security models. But when it comes to someone completely new to the concept of security, ZA is the way to go. When they have enough knowledge to see the limitations, they will speak up.

tomrc - I just pulled ZA off of my system and installed the latest copy of SPF and used TaskInfo 2000 to monitor CPU usage. SPF (v4.0, build 670) hovers around 2% - usually a touch more, I'd call it an average of around 2.25% with jumps up to 5%. ZA (v2.1.44) sits there idling at about 1%, with jumps up to maybe 3%. So for my money, ZA beats SPF in the CPU usage footprint round. Can't speak for Tiny as I haven't run/examined it. I 100% agree with your comments above. Going back to ZA now, thank you very much! As one of the rule-making impaired, it suits me to a T!:)

System: Pentium II/450 MHz.

I can't speak for anything windows based but ZA or Tiny and they are about the only windows security products I trust. Using various tools, ZA has a much larger footprint. But, if you trust it and can get peer support on it, what's a meg?

The resource consumption arguement means nothing to the novice. If it costs them 5 meg (hardly the case) the security and basic knowledge is well worth the cost.

Stay a ZA advocate, and don't even bother trying to justify it . It's a great product. My preferences are different, but that's me. I know that I can easily misconfigure my firewalls (yes plural) and shoot myself in the foot in the process. But I have have a "good" grasp on how IP works, so my configurations are geared at that.

The people looking for help here don't give a [xxxx] about the details. Those are discussed behind the scenes, and occasional publicly posted. Instead, they want to boot their machine and know it is secure...

...ZA gives them that.

While you run the freeware version of Zone Alarm, I on the other hand, run the Pro version. And while I did not notice a big difference at first, now I would not be on the internet without it.
I find ZAPro easy to use and easy to setup. And with it running behind my Linksys router, I feel more secure than if I was just using the router.
All hardware firewalls are good in their own way, but with a software firewall like Zone Alarm Freeware or Pro, nobody can go wrong with the added protection.

I also tried Tiny Personal Firewall, and found it to be a trifle confusing. Although it is currently off my system for now, and after some personal health issues are taken care of, to where I can concentrate on the program to configure it, I may re-install the program. Until then, it is Zone Alarm is the choice for this user.

This is my personal recommendation. Everyone has their own preferences, so no flames please.

Hi everyone:)
For me I have chosen sygate only because my 139 port remained opened even when I used Tiny on GRC.com site and DSL report security test !!!
I had no problem with ZA on this level !
But I must say that because sygate fixed my problem without any special settings I named it easy and friendly !
Tiny gave some error messages with some freezing network problems ZA too
Well PC's are like men ! they have weird personalities what could work for you may not work for others
even if you have same PC's with same configuration ! Weird! And for me a good software must work like a laser missile "Fire and forget" If not I will not use it !

jonana - your situation is why I just about always list ZA, SPF and Tiny when someone simply asks for a firewall. I'll go on to say that ZA is my preferred choice. But as you found out, all systems are not the same and various hardware or software setups may keep something from running as smoothly on one as it did on another. That's why it is so nice to have CHOICES for free software firewalls, and all 3 of these products give reasonable protection for home users. Like tomrc said to me: stick with what works for you, what you trust and don't worry about making excuses for your choice.:)